[05.07.2024] Spelling/Grammar, AnKing Overhaul for Step 1 & 2/AnKingMed, ID 1463927

View Suggestion on AnkiHub

Think this is an ok change, looking at it seems we’ve got at least 59 other cards where we state “pregnant women” (+56 for “pregnant woman”) that could also be updated. Alternatively could be “pregnant females” where applicable?

Might want to seek out guidance from some medical orgs like the AMA style guide we’ve used in the past first

@AnKing-Maintainers Went ahead and checked the AMA Style guide we’ve used in the past when it comes to language usage and this change is in line with their recent recommendations. What do we think about making this change throughout the deck?

Posting about this issue in particular: Pregnancy Language Update | AMA Style Insider

Relevant section [11.12.1] of the full guide (can’t find the specific guidance on pregnant ___, but I think this applies still): Correct and Preferred Usage | AMA Manual of Style: A Guide for Authors and Editors | AMA Manual of Style | Oxford Academic

1 Like

Eh. Don’t think we need to make the change unless there’s a specific society guideline. Seems like AMA is neutral. What does ACOG say? That’d seem to be the relevant one to consult for this case

I’d be okay pregnant females. We’ve been changing all men/women to male/female already. At the same time don’t think this needs to be changed.

3 Likes

Just to clarify, the AMA to my reading is saying in those links that they recommend avoiding gendered terms and specifically say when gender is undescribed in studies to default to pregnant individual/person/etc.

ACOG in policy statement linked below state they also recommend avoiding exclusively gendered language but don’t give specific examples (though, I think we can assume this would apply). One caveat they give is that if an original source/study uses gendered language they may continue to do so when referencing that material. Which, of course, we’re basically exclusively referencing other material in the deck so that could apply here as well.

1 Like

I think these guidelines will be refined in future to be gender neutral, personally I am okay with either. However I’d lean towards supporting as it will be inclusive and make the deck future proof. It is a subtle change.

2 Likes

Good point

I think we shouldn’t change unless there is a 100% clear guideline change. If it does change in the future I can see the argument for it then, but we are just a step prep deck and shouldn’t make changes unless stated clearly elsewhere (for any other topic we would never make a preemptive change to be future-proof, we should be consistent in that application)

1 Like

If going neutral I think I’d prefer “pregnant patients” instead of individuals. but okay with pregnant females.

6 Likes

I like pregnant patients as well

6 Likes

+1 for either pregnant females or pregnant patients

3 Likes

Support this option ^

1 Like

@AnKing-Maintainers Just bringing us all back in on this since we’ve got a few options; everybody good with standardizing to “pregnant patients” throughout the deck?

8 Likes

It looks like ACOG and AMA are on board so I’m on board. Let’s do it

Looks like majority support pregnant patients, so that will do the trick.

Will accept and make change to the remainder of cards in the deck

1 Like